PzIV tactical suggestions?

[Commissar]

I was wondering what favorite tactics people use when using the old workhorse PzIV. I'd like to be able to use them better and perhaps keep more of them alive. Playing with Tigers and Panthers all the time is sexier but the playing with PzIV more often would probably be more "accurate." Thanks for any of your tips.

[ 10-22-2001: Message edited by: Commissar ]

[Skipper]

Almost same as with vanilla Shermans. Narrow lanes of fire, mutual support, flanking attacks etc. A bit more emphasis on sniping, bit less on melee combat.

[Bruno Weiss]

Stealth and sniping. A vet MkIV is fairly accurate at range. I try and keep mine from becomming up close and personal. Reduces their life expectancy to such annoyances as a 40mm.

[Gpig]

I just had some great success with MkIV's working together.

SPOILER

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

I was playing Merry Christmas at Hourmuelle (off the disk), and as the Axis you get about 8 pz IV's and 2 Panthers.

It's a winter scenario with a bunch of crisscrossing roads, along the tops of ridgelines. Staying on the roads paints you as a big fat target against the sky. So racing to the small depressions along their length becomes very important.

I moved a platoon of MkIV's to the top of one of these ridges (all on the road) and set two of them up in HULL DOWN overwatch as I prepared to leap frog the plt.

Then the greatest sequence happened. As I moved my first panzer at FAST down the road and to the nearest gully (about 250m away), a pair of Sherman "Easy Eights" popped up, about 800m down range. They both sighted my racing Mk IV to take him out. But soon after that happened, my overwatch panzers lit 'em up, one of which blew sky high. Nice team work is fun to watch. I could only just imagine the great dust/snow cloud billowing out behind my racing MkIV and the HUGE target it must have looked like. Suckered them poor shermans in GOOD.

Gpig

[Soddball]

After my most recent experience with a Veteran Panzer IV (destroyed by a Stuart at 530m after missing five shots at same Stuart :eek: my advice is:

Buy a Panther.

[Leta]

Agreed with Soddball.

The best tactic with PzIV is: DON'T USE IT.

[Dogface21]

They always seem to be the first armored units to bite it, but I have had some luck with em. Just be a sneaky bastard, use them for long range flank shots, and hope for the best. The best performance Ive ever gotten was somthing like 4 sherms and a few halftacks out of a vet PzIV, he was toasted by a sneaky greyhound a few turns later.

[Skipper]

I think, I'd take three Pz-IVs instead of two Panthers any day (except flat desert terrain). But then, I mostly play Allies, and mostly use vanilla armor, anyway.

[Slapdragon]

Now now, I am fight against Dorosh and a pack of fireflies, and the more expensive Tigers and Panther die like sheep at a mutton factory, but my MkIVs, many of which died, still survive after a fashion, sniping at half tracks and infantry.

[Tero]

They are good infantry support tanks. Let the AI do the targeting unless you see a priority target (MG, mortar).

When using them to support infantry advances it is imperative you preceed with infantry well ahead of them. The infantry can absorb punishment better and they do the spotting.

BTW: I do not know if this has been reported before: a regular PBEM opponent of mine have found out that there is a low-LOS spotting anomaly that lets your units spot the opponent units better if it is the infantry unit who acquires the target first. The other way around the infantry unit will not benefit from the armour absolute spotting. We have observed several instances when an infantry unit can not spot/target an enemy tank eventhough a friendly tank has spotted and targeted it.

In general: keep them well back with good field of fire, cover the flanks though. If contact with armour is imminent do NOT target with the main gun unless it is a do or die situation. I personally try to have at least one platoon covering one PzKw-IV.

Pairing them with pzschrecks is a good way to confuse enemy armoured tracking and targeting.

[Commissar]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Slapdragon:

Now now, I am fight against Dorosh and a pack of fireflies, and the more expensive Tigers and Panther die like sheep at a mutton factory, but my MkIVs, many of which died, still survive after a fashion, sniping at half tracks and infantry.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Tungsten is just a drag if you're the Germans. Towards later in the war, having Tigers and Panthers don't seem to be worth it since the later Shermans and other Allied tanks can slice right through your frontal armor with tungsten rounds. Consequently, PzIVs seem to be better since they still can take out most Allied tanks for much cheaper. If you are going to be vulnerable to tungsten, might as well do it cheaply. Hetzers are still useful too I believe. I love those little bastards.

[RMC]

Pz IVs are extremely problematic. I tend to think they were more effective in RL than in CM, but who knows. They seem particularly vulnerable to shoot and scoot 37mm-armed vehicles like the Stuart and Greyhound and somehow it doesn't feel right.

Anyway, they are vulnerable to everything. Everyone know the turret is equipped with aluminum foil armor and has powerful electromagnets that lure in unsuspecting AP rounds. Added to that is their penchant for dying from Jabos. Their top armor is just too thin. Jabos will drop the heavy stuff at your cats and then use guns to thin out your Pz IVs.

To answer the oringinal question, I never found a way that seemed remotely effective. I used to think of the PZ IV as the unsung hero of the panzerwaffe, forgotten in the shadow of its bigger brothers. CM cured me of that.

[Gen-x87H]

I find they are great cannon fodder to keep your big cats from being hit by pesky Allied Tungsten. I played a ME against a guy last weekend. 3000 point ME auto pick. I found this game the most fun I have ever played. He ended up with 13 tanks ranging from a plain jane Sherman upto Churchill VIIIs.

I got a couple of Hetzers, StugIII and a Stuh.

Then I grouped my other tanks into a formation. 3 PZIVs, 2 KTs and a Panther G.

Sent a Moto SS platoon in front and the PZIVs just a bit behind them and the big cates behind them. It was heavy fog so the Allied had a slight advantage IMHO. Anyways after he hit my main lines in the city I just held out until my flanking manuever could come in from the side. We hit the first flag and overran 2 platoons of British. My SS platoons got mauled But I lost my first PZIV in the attack to a churchill. This caused his main thrust to come back at my flanking manuever.

In the end it became a draw. My PZIvs got smacked but they served the sole purpose of finding the Churchilles and Sherman 76s before my big cats did. They even got a few kills.

My KTs performed horribly. One of his Shermans who kille the Panther on a side shot later was shot at by my KTs 8 times at 200 meters and theymissed every friggin time!

Finally a hetzer got it!

Gen

[109 Gustav]

They are useful in combination with panthers, or when used in groups of 3-5. Individually they just don't cut it, they die too easily. They are quite useful on the attack, though. Use panthers in overwatch, covering the advancing IVs from hull down. The IVs are better equipped to handle surprises and flank shots due to their faster turret rotation. Besides, if you're going to lose a tank to an ambushing flank shot, it might as well be the IV and not the more expensive panther.

When on the defense, try to use them from ambush, in the same manner as the StuG and jagdpanzers, perpindicular to the enemy's line of advance. Hilltop shoot and scooting also works reasonably well.

They are a good, but not a great, infantry support tank. The high velocity cannon means that you can keep them a little further back from the enemy's troops and still cause plenty of damage. Also, the skirts on the IVH and IVJ will help against the occasional zook round, although they shouldn't be relied on too heavily.

[PiggDogg]

Pz4's - ouch. I have had no success with them. I have seldomly seen any opponent of mine having any success with them. Everything kills them. However, they do have a good gun.

Treat Pz4s just like you would a short barrelled Sherman. In fact, I would choose a short barrelled Sherman before I would choose a Pz4.

Cheers, Richard :cool: :cool:

[JasonC]

"I tend to think they were more effective in RL than in CM, but who knows. They seem particularly vulnerable to shoot and scoot 37mm-armed vehicles"

I think this is an artifact of particularly short range fights, especially in quick battles. The Pz IV is a better tank than the vanilla Sherman, by a long way, but its strength does not show up in a hipshoot at 400 yards. The stuff below is about the "H" model, the most common in the period covered in CMBO and the best buy. The "G" model has weaker hull armor, which you don't want. The "J" has a slow turret, a weakness not worth saving 1 point over.

37mm guns can't get through the Pz IVH front hull, and they can penetrate the turret consistently only out to 750 meters. Out to 1000 meters, they have a chance of getting through the turret, but kills are rare. From about 1050 meters and upward, a 37mm has no chance from the front, even against the turret. Meanwhile the excellent gun on the Pz IV will kill every vehicle that mounts a 37mm at any range or angle.

At range the fight against those light critters is all one way, and even close in they need turret hits, while anything will do in reply. If you get into a hull down duel with a Stuart at 500 yards, you deserve to lose, because you aren't using your hull armor, his gun's limited effective range, etc.

Plain 75mm Shermans - M4, M4A1, M4A3 - can be beaten by exploiting the combined strength of the Pz IV gun and the weakness of the Sherman gun. You want the range to be over 1000 yards (1100 to 1200 is safer, though) and under 1500 yards. In that window, the Sherman's short 75 can only kill the Pz IV with a turret hit. Hull hits will only cause armor flaking, at the worst. Meanwhile, the Pz IVs shots will go through every plate of the Shermans, even the well sloped upper hull plate, because of the poor 85% armor quality on the plain Shermans.

Also, the combination of a higher gun velocity and slightly lower sillouette will make the Pz IV 15-25% more accurate at those ranges. With a higher chance of hits and all of yours lethal, while his lower chances have to find the turret to get a kill, you can easily outshoot 1-2 platoons of 5 plain Shermans each, with a single platoon of 4 Pz IVs. Provided you know your strengths and engage at a range of 1100-1500 yards.

The (W) model 75mm Shermans are a tougher opponent, because they have improved hull armor and better armor quality as well. To get through the lower hull you have to be under 500 meters, and to get through the upper hull you have to be more like 250 meters and without significant side angle to boot. Meanwhile their gun is just as good as the other Shermans, so your hull becomes vunerable at around 1000 yards.

Your best bet against those (75mm W armor) is a hull down duel at 1200-1500 yards, where both sides need turret hits to get a kill, but your higher muzzle velocity and lower outline make your hit chances better than his. If you can't get that, you want to get the drop on him from point blank range, or to go for a side shot.

The upgunned allied tanks, 76mm and better, can kill you at any range. You can kill the TDs at any range too, and the M4A1 76mm Shermans, so those are straight "quick draw" affairs - the first to hit wins.

The M4A3 76mm W tanks - like the "easy eight" - outmatch you, because you can only kill their turret or side, except at the closest range, and they can kill you at any range. You have to stalk them as gingerly as US TDs stalk Panthers. Hull down is better than not if you have to fight them from the front, because you are more likely to get the vunerable turret if you do get a hit.

As for the Jumbos and such, they are "Tigers" to you - you will need side hits to kill them.

Against infantry, Pz IVs are effective because of their 2 MGs with good ammo, the turret to acquire new targets fast, and a good load of HE shells.

You usually want to use these tanks in pairs, with infantry scouting ahead of them, much like Allied tanks. Even when operating at ranges where the armor will protect you, it is better to do so, because it will make hits come faster. And your turret is generally vunerable even at range (except to 37mm), so knocking out the enemy rapidly is important for self defense. A pair of Pz IVs will rapidly do a number on infantry positions, too.

I think people's disappointment with them stems from (1) being spoiled by uberarmor, to the point of not knowing what to do if any part of the tank is vunerable to enemy AP rounds, (2) only fighting at knife-fight ranges, where the hull armor isn't good enough even against 37mm and short 75mm, and (3) not using proper teamwork and combined arms, the same as Allied tankers always have to do.

[von Lucke]

To go off on a bit of a tangent, I've often thought that going hull-down with MkIVs and Shermans to be somewhat self-defeating. Both tanks weakest armor is around the turret (and both have O deg. mantlet slope). Going hull-down is just begging to be killed with a turret penetration. Better to ease up far enough where your frontal armor is at an flatter angle (increasing it's relative thickness), yet still targetable by the enemy.

[Iron Chef Sakai]

i concur, i'll take panzer IVs over a sherman any day, the shermans silouette gigantic for a tank that is not very heavily armored, and by late war standards was undergunned compared to comprable german and soviet tanks of the era. luckily we were able ot mass produce them in the numbers needed to overwhelm the enemy. with a great deal of help from allied air support. 90% of the germans heavy tanks were knocked out by aircraft, and most others were simply abandoned by their crew due to running out of petrol. i also like the inovation of the side skirt on the panzer IV's, it was a very good idea, though more of a factor on the eastern front. alot of people like panthers and tigers, wich are obviously great tanks, but pound for pound i like the panzer IVG. i also find they have more range and manuverablity on the battlefield, and are great for infantry support as well taking out armor if used right. now if only they had gyrostablaizers like the shermans....that would be very handy

[Amidst_Void]

I'm the only one that's going to say this, but, I really do love the PzIV. Why? Because they truly bring a sense of humor to the game. There isn't one other tank, that I know of, that can totally let you down like the IV's can. I have difficulty remembering any instance where an IV, or groups of IV's, came even CLOSE to accomplashing a planed attack. I don't even worry about it anymore, in fact, I expect the IV's to fail misserably at whatever orders I give them. (except driving off the map)

Don't even get me started on armor thickness. This tank will get taken out by a Conscript U.S. soldier chucking pine cones.

My suggestion is to go for StuG's. (hippoes as I like to call them) The StuG's will absorb light guns (37mm) at times with their 80mm frontal armor and you don't have to worry about the FOAM TURRET that the IV's have.

[RMC]

Is going hulldown will one really self-defeating?

This is right up Jason's statistical alley. Does the reduction in hit chance out weight the guaranteed turret hit or is the overall chance of being killed lower with the hull exposed?

[Tero]

<blockquote>quote:</font><hr>Originally posted by RMC:

Is going hulldown will one really self-defeating?

This is right up Jason's statistical alley. Does the reduction in hit chance out weight the guaranteed turret hit or is the overall chance of being killed lower with the hull exposed?<hr></blockquote>

Cross section targeting.

[Ex Bellator]

Yes guys, NEVER go hull down with a PzIV against 75mm or less opponents. We had a thread on this around a year ago and thanks to lots of tests it was proved that forcing the enemy to shoot at the turret means you always get more dead PzIVs than if they were out in the open.

Simply put, the 'to-hit' penalty does not outweigh the fact that your turret will be hit. When the PzIV is out in the open the opponent will shoot at the centre of mass and probably hit the hull which has decent armour.

Of course if you're facing 76mm opposition then Hull Down is probably better. Or try reversing back to Berlin...

[Redwolf]

Speaking of skirts, has anyone been able to confirm that they do good against PIAT or Bazooka?

In quick tests I found the kill probabilty equal for skirt and non-skirt variants.

[russellmz]

<blockquote>quote:</font><hr>Originally posted by Rex_Bellator:

Yes guys, NEVER go hull down with a PzIV against 75mm or less opponents. We had a thread on this around a year ago and thanks to lots of tests it was proved that forcing the enemy to shoot at the turret means you always get more dead PzIVs than if they were out in the open.

Simply put, the 'to-hit' penalty does not outweigh the fact that your turret will be hit. When the PzIV is out in the open the opponent will shoot at the centre of mass and probably hit the hull which has decent armour.

Of course if you're facing 76mm opposition then Hull Down is probably better. Or try reversing back to Berlin...<hr></blockquote>

http://www.battlefront.com/discuss/Forum1/HTML/013585-3.html

Combat Mission makes an assumption about gunnery: crews are assumed to fire at the "center of mass" of a target, and not to have detailed knowledge of varying armor thicknesses of the different parts of its target. By that I mean that a crew is not assumed to know that, for example, a vehicle has a thinner turret front armor than front hull (which is the case for the Pz IV). Crews do understand basic things like flank armor being thinner than front, and cases where an opponent outmatches them or cannot be killed (e.g. a Stuart faced with a King Tiger).

So this can lead to results which might seem odd at first, but make sense when you think about it. Consider the case of a Sherman firing on a Pz IV.

If the Pz IV is in the open, the Sherman will fire at its "center of mass", which means that a hit on the hull is quite likely (which let's say will not penetrate, for the sake of argument). If we assume that a hit on the thinner turret armor will penetrate, then the overall chance of penetration is only moderate, as has been observed.

If the Pz IV is hull-down, the Sherman is forced by circumstance to fire at the turret (note that some of the upper hull is considered exposed so occasional shells can strike the upper hull of a hull-down target). Most hits will therefore strike the turret, (nearly) guaranteeing penetration. The chance of hitting the Pz IV is lowered, of course.

So we have a situation in which the Sherman is actually better off firing at the turret rather than the Pz IV's "center of mass", penetration-wise, because the turret has thinner armor.

Given that CM assumes that the Sherman crew does not know this, however, the Sherman will not take advantage of this fact when the Pz IV is out in the open. Only when the Pz IV is hull down will the Sherman do the "right thing" even though it's not aware of it. This is an intentional part of the design.

A very, very early version of CM (in the alpha stage, I think) allowed crews to know all the weak spots of all enemy vehicles and make snap decisions about where to aim. And the results were problematic, because we suddenly had "robotic" tank crews that made "perfect" decisions far too often. It also had a strong imbalancing effect because it especially increased the effectiveness of Allied tank crews, since several German tanks have the "varying armor" characteristic in place (Pz IV has 'weak' turret, Panther has 'weak' lower hull, etc.) We were seeing Sherman crews picking off German tanks right in their 'thin' spots at a rate which seemed far too high to be historically accurate. So we took out that "perfect" knowledge. I think it was the right decision, but of course you do get what seems to be the strange result of a PzIV having to think twice before going hull-down in the face of 75mm weapons. It does actually make sense in the big picture though.

Charles

[Vanir Ausf B]

<blockquote>quote:</font><hr>Originally posted by Rex_Bellator:

Yes guys, NEVER go hull down with a PzIV against 75mm or less opponents.<hr></blockquote>

Depends on the range. 75mm can penetrate the Pz IV hull out past 1000m anyway, so at less than 1000m you really don't lose anything by going hull down.

I would say the only Allied tanks you should worry about not going hull down against are the 37mm armed ones.

<blockquote>quote:</font><hr>Redwolf:

Speaking of skirts, has anyone been able to confirm that they do good against PIAT or Bazooka?

In quick tests I found the kill probabilty equal for skirt and non-skirt variants<hr></blockquote>

Yes, they do work. The big skirts on the Pz IV cause a roughly 30% that a bazooka hit will not penetrate. Even the tiny little skirts on the Panther A work, though to to a much lesser extent (roughly 3%).